ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Plant-based dietary patterns and ultra-processed food consumption: a cross-sectional analysis of the UK Biobank.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Fast food consumption and risk of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Associations Between Ultra-Processed Food (UPF) Consumption and Weight Change and Obesity Risk Among Consumers of Plant-Based Diets: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Nutrition AssociationPooled it
- Nutrient and Discretionary Food Intake in Vegan Adult Australians: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrition bulletin · 2026Article
- Article
- Ultra-processed food intake and its nutritional consequences among youth when consuming vegan, lacto-ovo-vegetarian, pescatarian or omnivore diets: a cross-sectional study.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
- Plant-Based Diets, Ultra-Processed Foods, and Risks of Mortality and Major Chronic Diseases: A Prospective Cohort Study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- The association of plant or animal food origin and processing level with BMI and waist circumference: a prospective cohort study of the UK Biobank.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Ultra-processed food consumption across early life: implications for pediatric health and disease risk.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Interaction between chronotype and ultra-processed food intake on triglyceride-glucose index in Korean adults.Nutrition research and practice · 2025Article
- Higher Consumption of Ultra-Processed Foods Is Associated with Lower Plant-Based Diet Quality in Australian Adults.Nutrients · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Dietary shift towards more plant-based options is increasingly popular, but the quantity of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) they contain is largely unknown. This study assessed the level of UPF and minimally processed food consumption among regular and low red meat eaters, flexitarians, pescatarians, vegetarians and vegans in a large dataset of United Kingdom (UK) adults. Methods: This is a cross-sectional analysis of the UK Biobank participants recruited between December 19, 2006, and October 1, 2010. Responses to food frequency questions were used to identify diet types for vegans (never eating any animal-based foods); vegetarians (never eating meat/fish); pescatarians (never eating meat); flexitarians (consumed fish/meat under twice a week); low red meat eaters (consumed fish/poultry more than once a week but red/processed meat under twice a week); and regular red meat eaters (consumed red/processed meat more than once a week). Consumption of all food and drinks collected in 24-h recalls between April 29, 2009, and June 28, 2012, were categorised using the Nova classification. The primary outcomes are the consumption of UPFs and minimally processed foods, expressed as a percentage of daily food intake (grams/day). Multivariable linear regression assessed the mean percentage point difference in UPF and minimally processed food consumption between diet types. Findings: This study included 199,502 UK Biobank participants (mean age 58.2 [standard deviation 7.9] years; 55.1% women). The mean UPF consumption was 24.2%, 21.9%, 22.0%, 20.4%, 23.8%, and 22.7% among 75,091 regular red meat eaters, 70,144 low red meat eaters, 45,057 flexitarians, 4932 pescatarians, 4119 vegetarians and 159 vegans, respectively. The adjusted results suggested that compared with regular red meat eaters, UPF consumption was 1.3 percentage points higher among vegetarians (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9, 1.7) and lower among low red meat eaters (-1.3, 95% CI: -1.4, -1.1), flexitarians (-0.8, 95% CI: -1.0, -0.7), and pescatarians (-1.6, 95% CI: -1.9, -1.2). The UPF consumption in vegans were not significantly different from regular red meat eaters (1.2 percentage points, 95% CI: -0.7, 3.2). Minimally processed food consumption was higher in all other types of diet than regular red meat eaters, with an adjusted percentage point difference ranged from 0.4 (95% CI: 0.005, 0.9) for vegetarians to 3.2 (95% CI: 1.0, 5.5) for vegans compared with regular red meat eaters. Interpretation: This UK-based study found higher UPF consumption in vegetarian diets and lower in diets with a modest amount of meat or fish. It is important that policies which encourage the urgently needed transition to more sustainable dietary patterns also promote rebalancing diets towards minimally processed foods. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research, World Cancer Research Fund.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.